Is random required

Your thoughts on randomness. Is it required or not for intelligence ? Now we can get into an argument about what is intelligence, but if we can, lets avoid that if possible and assume "everybody knows".

The real question, I am trying to ask I guess, is there a problem where the optimal solution requires randomness ? I.e a response not based on any current or prior input ?

Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement

Are you talking about the ability for a machie to have "thoughts" based on more than simply 1+1=2? Imagination, leaps of logic, et cetera?

I think random in ther way many programmers think of it may not be required. Rather, like Hammurabi's Code, I would suggest trying to outline basic fundamental concepts of logic and morality or whatever, and giving the beast examples of how to respond. Such examples would have certain flag points in them which would be used as a measure of how appropriate they are for any given situation. The beast would then build responses and solutions based on maximising the number of similar such points.

I have no idea how to code this, it's just my idea. I've been considering the principles behind this for a couple of years.

Using my idea as mentioned, also give the beast the ability to form and memorise new examples with such determining points as it learns by applying older examples to current situations. By analysing a current situation and matching factors to previous examples, and storing these new examples, it would literally learn in a way much like we humans do.

If one is thinking of randomness similar to "aimlessly" then there may be a merit. For example, when I travel to a new place on business and have to stay over the weekend, I drive aimlessly to see the area, then once I see interesting stuff, then next time I can zero in to that place.

No. it wont be the neural network as we know and use today. Human brain is not a single program and system. It is a whole ecosystem with its own subsystems even within the higher brain functions (the human level as opposed to the automated systems).

I do not think creativity comes from the standard neural net brain that everyone uses to go about their merry way everyday. These are subsystems that experiment and may be partially based on certain randomness. Even the randomness would have an Integral component from state A to state B but not state C(just like a random number can be within certain differential but not certain other numbers - such as random from 10 to 100 but not 50 to 60)

The following is a trivial example of the use of the VB random number generator.

I recently wrote a VB application which finds roots of polynomials. It uses a successive approximation method which requires an initial guess for each real root and for each pair of complex roots.

The most effective method I could devise used the VB random number generator to choose initial guesses. While there might be better approaches, the use of random guesses never failed, and it seemed faster than some more systematic methods I tried.

I once speculated about genius being based on a fast random idea generator and an effective idea evaluator. If we ever figure out how the brain functions, perhaps it might be something simple that does not seem to be what we think of as intelligence.

I think the randomness is in the environment. It doesn't have to be present in the AI itself.

Randomness may make a program seem more intelligent (since it's not constantly repeating itself, a sure sign of non-intelligence), but a complex enough system would react complexly (and seemingly randomly) to its environment. Wouldn't it?

Everything is random. Now...in the present. oh wait just then.
See what I mean. Our cognitive process is the equivalent of a baby putting alphabet blocks together to form a sentence. Each block is a memory ;or a marker of felt time. And so we build these towering helixs of memory. I say helix because I don't know what that would look like. And so you have these towers of memory blocks built up. Each block is a part of thinking. We think while we do. Then we think of what we do. Then it becomes what we did. Except, without current technology, or perception of time goes out the window. Yeah!!! we invented the clock. Wow! Equally spaced units of time. That's great...in reality. But what is reality? And so I ask, have you ever had a day at work that was great;or just fine? The day went by fast huh. This is because you weren't thinking the day away. You were feeling the day away. And so not many of the memory blocks were used. Ever had a really crappy day at work. It went on forever because you were looking a the clock randomly. Look at a clock some time. It moves at a certain speed. slow..and if you get stoned or drunk and look at that clock for about an hour, you will notice that your brain begins to think for itself regardless of your ego's will. Because at that point, your brain is feeling and thinking at the same time. This is where I believe that creativity originates. Back to the clock.. you have many memory blocks of this one thing.(the clock) due to looking periodically. If you know what having a dream is like, then you know what it is like without time. It is most certainly random. And random is good for one reason. It is involved in the process of you being yourself at any point in time, and it is the poetry of the universe molding who you want and ought to be.